W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and HTML5 <main> element

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:21:17 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+ri+V=9fHYOMd-O=rzAgrdn-ctEDUgyqN9s+x4PhChSV_eoCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Yang <ian@invigoreight.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi Ian,

> Ian Hixie, he mentioned that the existence of the ARIA landmark role
"main" is a mistake

>That's very thought-provoking

how so? hixie offers no concrete reasons and there are concrete use cases
for role=main and <main> none of which hixie has managed to dispute.

both role=main and now <main> are part of the web platform and
interoperably implemented across browsers and assistive technology, so I
suggest that they will not be discarded even due to an opinion of Hixie's


with regards

--
SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>


On 23 March 2013 14:57, Ian Yang <ian@invigoreight.com> wrote:

> Hi editors and all other folks,
>
> In a previous discussion with Ian Hixie, he mentioned that the existence
> of the ARIA landmark role "main" is a mistake. In other words, the role
> "main" should not have been introduced.
>
> That's very thought-provoking. I used to be one of those who supported the
> adoption of the HTML5 <main> element. Yet after reconsidering the above
> theory these days, I seem to gradually realize that a mechanism for
> differentiating main contents from other contents is not always necessary.
>
> I may have missed a past discussion about this topic. Could someone point
> me out a resource? Personally, I think this topic is very worth discussing.
> However, it might lead to discards of the ARIA landmark role "main" and the
> HTML5 <main> element.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Ian Yang
>
Received on Saturday, 23 March 2013 15:22:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 23 March 2013 15:22:26 GMT